From WikiWorld

Jump to: navigation, search

the only thing i could google up for "skinners law" is the fact that "...correct or desired behaviour is reinforced but his theory also purported that no action should be taken after incorrect or undesired behaviour, in the hope that this behaviour would gradually disappear."

this of course throws up the question how "desired behaviour" is defined, or how it is enforced. throw up more, please. -- ClemensFischer

That's unbelievable. History has almost erased him. See

Skinner practically founded Behaivioral Science, but got a bum rap. He was accused of being Facist, Communist, the epitimy of the misuse of science, and lots of other bad stuff.

  • Must individual freedoms be "sacrificed" for the sake of the culture? Most of my critics contend that I am saying so, but the answer depends on how people are induced to work for the good of their culture. If they do so under a threat of punishment, then freedom (from such a threat) is sacrificed, but if they are induced to do so through positive reinforcement, their sense of freedom is enhanced (Skinner, 1978, p.198)

The thing that pissed people off most was his implication that we are just like DumbAnimals. He did the experiments and presented the results. It not his fault we ARE DumbAnimals.

He showed that humans learn the same way chickens do, and if we want humans to behave well we we can train them just like we can train chickens.

This will be only the 7th page on Google about one of our great scientists- unbelievable.

We do train people, but we use methodology that is outmoded, we make laws and punish people. Research shows that that is a bad strategy. It doent't work. We are in denial of the truth.

I should have know Skinner was a goner, I could see the disgust in peoples faces when his name was mentioned. I agreed with them, the Human IS much more than a chicken. But does that mean we should treat our chickens well, and punish ourselves?.

In our SocialContract and DeclarationOfInterdependence we agree to treat each other well, but tax only behavior which is a liability for society, thereby creating a reward, no tax, for good behaviors, while enriching our freedom, and sustaining our planet by taxing it's exploitation.

But we won't need the tax money, we will fund the creation of value using the FutureValue it represents, and populate the galaxy and beyond.

  "in the hope that this (undesired) behaviour would gradually disappear"

is a classic mispreresentation of his results, unrewarding behavior does dissapear, the results are conclusive.

Let's stop the madness.

The heart of the matter may be that it is wrong to trust statistical results when applied to an individual human being, but with respect to civilization the numbers don't lie, denial is irresponsible and poor StatisticalThinking.

Failure to tax is not a reward, it is NegativeReinforcement, removal of a PositivePunishment when desired behavior is exhibited. It's been shown to work, but not as well as PositiveReinforcement.

For Discussion, see SkinnersLawVirtualClassroom

This page is featured on the TourOfWikiWorld.

Personal tools